HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit 88-10-DR - COSTCO - PARKING LOT EXPANSION DESIGN REVIEW88-10-dr
1160 saxon drive
costco parking
. :
APPLICANT: Costco DESIGN REVIEW
City cif Tukwila
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
6200 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila, Washington 98188
(206) 433 -1849
NOTICE OF DECISION
FILE NUMBER: 88- 10 -DR: Costco Parking Lot Expansion
REQUEST: Construct a 365 -space expansion of an existing parking lot
on a 2.57 -acre site.
LOCATION: 1160 Saxon Drive, in SW of Sec. 25, Twn. 23, Rge. 4, Tukwila, WA
The Board of Architectural Review (BAR) conducted a review of the request on
August 25, 1988, and approved this project subject to the attached conditions.
The BAR adopted the Findings and Conclusions contained in the staff report dated
August 8, 1988.
Any party aggrieved by this decision may appeal the decision to the City Coun-
cil by filing an appeal in writing with the City Clerk within ten (10) days of
the above date and shall state the reasons for the appeal.
(29 /NTC.COSTCO)
Vernon Umetsu
Associate Planner
DATE: 8/-2 ` 1 798
Board of Architectural Review
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
File 88- 10 -DR: Costco Parking Lot Expansion
1. Light standard designs
2. Illumination plans
3. Picnic area fixture designs
The following shall be submitted for Planning Director review
and approval:
:.n;:... • �!�r' ..:j: .:: ;'•s..;. , . ^. .. ,,.; , •.�.�.,. �.:: .- .: n:. ..,�. .o ' pu!:: ... , y ,. • .,�. am .i": �x .. :...�.'f_� .... o '2S .. ; ve m
,., �i" . - �.:
A+`I`T'
City of Tukwila
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
6200 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila, Washington 98188
(206) 433 -1849
CITY OF TUKWILA
PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 25, 1988
The meeting was called to order at 8:03 p.m. by Mr. Haggerton,
Vice Chairman. Members present were Messrs. Cagle, Kirsop,
Verhalen, Haggerton, Knudson and Hamilton.
Mr. Coplen was absent.
Representing the staff were Jack Pace, Vernon Umetsu, and Joanne
Johnson.
MINUTES
MR. KNUDSON MOVED THAT THE JULY 28, 1988 AND AUGUST 2, 1988
MINUTES BE APPROVED AS WRITTEN. MR. HAMILTON SECONDED THE MOTION
WHICH PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mr. Haggerton distributed a letter to each of the Commission from
Marilynn J. Van Hise which commented on the procedure followed at
the July 28, 1988 public hearing and offering suggestions for
improvement. She also commented on the Riverton annexation
proposal.
87 -1 -SUB GATEWAY CORPORATE CENTER Request for Final Plat
approval.
Mr. Jack Pace, Senior Planner reviewed the staff report recom-
mending approval of the Final Plat and that it be forwarded to
the City Council subject to conditions stated in the Staff
Report.
Mr. Paul Konrady represented the applicant and stated he concur-
red with the Staff's recommendations.
MR. KIRSOP MOVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACCEPT THE KAISER
GATEWAY REQUEST AND FORWARD THE FINAL PLAT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
WITH THE RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS
OUTLINED IN THE STAFF REPORT.
:,
...
Planning Commission
August 25, 1988
Page two
The Conditions read as follows:
1. DEDICATION
Know all men by these present that we, the undersigned,
owners in fee simple of the land hereby platted, hereby
declare, dedicate and convey to the City of Tukwila for the
use of the public forever all streets, water, storm drainage
and sanitary sewer systems located on easements and rights -
of -way shown thereon and the use thereof for all public
purposes not inconsistent with the use thereof for public
roadway and utility purposes; also the right to make all
necessary slopes for cuts and fills upon the lots and blocks
shown on this plat in the original reasonable grading of the
streets and alleys shown hereon. IN WITNESS THEREOF we have
set our hands and seals.
2. The lot line or fence in Lot 4 will need to be adjusted to
meet the setback requirements of the Tukwila Zoning Code
(TMC 18.50.020)..
MR. KNUDSON SECONDED THE MOTION WHICH WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
88 -7 -DR EMBASSY SUITES HOTEL -- Request for design review
approval to construct an 8- story, 236 -room hotel and separate 3-
story parking structure on a 3.27 -acre site.
Vernon Umetsu, Associate Planner, reviewed the proposal using
slides of the site, as well as site plans depicting the design of
the proposal. He reviewed the Staff Report recommending denial
of the request and that guidance be provided to better satisfy
criteria as outlined in the recommendations on page 6 of the
staff report.
Mr. Dick Chapin, attorney representing the applicant did not
agree with the comments in the staff report.
Mr. Dean Powell, Mesa Az, also represented the applicant,
reviewed the proposal. He entered into the record the interior
design of the suites as Exhibit A. He commented on the outside
details of the proposal entering into the record the outside
elevations of the proposal as Exhibit B. Next,he reviewed the
site plan, entering it into the record as Exhibit C. He re-
quested that the Commission approve the proposal as presented.
"
Planning Commission
August 25, 1988
Page three
Jim Nelson represented Helen Nelson who owns property adjacent to
the site. He stated that she approves the design as presented by
the applicant.
MR. KNUDSON MOVED TO CONTINUE THE REVIEW OF THIS PROPOSAL AND
ACCEPT THE FOOT PRINT AND BASIC DESIGN OF THE HOTEL WITH MODIFIC-
ATIONS TO THE PARKING GARAGE TO GET A BETTER BLENDING OF THE
STRUCTURE'S ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN WITH THE PARKING GARAGE AND
LANDSCAPING MODIFICATIONS TO REFLECT A MUCH ENHANCED LANDSCAPING
DESIGN, BASED ON THE STAFF'S FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF DESIGN
REVIEW, FILE NUMBER 88 -7 -DR. MR. HAMILTON SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED WITH VERHALEN, HAGGERTON, CAGLE, HAMILTON AND
KIRSOP VOTING YES. MR. KIRSOP VOTED NO.
A 5- minutes recess was called. The meeting reconvened at 9:45 pm.
88 -8 -DR: NORTH HILL OFFICE BUILDING -- Request for design review
approval to construct a 16,821 sq. ft. three story office
building with 46 parking spaces.
The applicant did not contest Commissioner Verhalep's partici-
pation in this action, even though he resides at the Sunwood
Condominiums which is adjacent to the North Hill Office Building
site.
Mr. Umetsu reviewed the Staff Report on the proposal, entering it
into the record as Exhibit I. He further clarified that the
staff report recommends approval subject to conditions outlined
on page 5.
Leon Grunstein, President of Gencor, stated he was in agreement
with Staff recommendations.
The colors to be used for the building were distributed for
Commission review.
Michael Glanz, architect, answered questions posed by the
Commission.
Mr. Steve Friedman spoke in favor of the proposal.
MR. KIRSOP MOVED TO ACCEPT THE SITE PLAN BASED ON STAFF'S
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS; SUBJECT TO RECOMMENDATIONS "A ", "B ",
"C" EXCEPT THE WESTERN ACCESS TO BE 24 FEET WIDE; AND "D ",
(ELIMINATION OF "E" BECAUSE THEY HAVE CONFORMED); AND "F'
Planning Commission
August 25, 1988
Page 4
The conditions read as follows:
A. Elimination of the northwest parking space, as discussed in
Criterion 1, to enhance the relationship of structure to
site and adjacent public street.
B. Establish the legal rights to use the western driveway for
joint access, as discussed in "Access ". (See staff report).
C. The frontage landscape shall be shifted approximately 8 feet
to the east, the western access increased to approximately
24 feet wide, and the eastern access modified to reflect a
20 -foot wide driveway. This will maximize compatibility
between on -site and street circulation patterns, as discus-
sed in Criterion 2. (See staff report).
D. A landscape plan prepared by a Washington - licensed landscape
architect shall be submitted. This plan shall reflect the
berming of front landscaping and an automatic irrigation
system.
E. Lighting plans must be provided.
MR. KNUDSON SECONDED THE MOTION WHICH PASSED WITH KIRSOP, VERHA-
LEN, HAGGERTON, CAGLE AND KNUDSON VOTING YES. MR. HAMILTON VOTED
NO.
88 -10 -DR COSTCO - Request to approve design review to construct a
365 space parking lot expansion and associated landscape /picnic
area.
Mr. Umetsu, planner, reviewed the staff report on the proposal
recommending approval subject to conditions.
Mr. Randall Gould, 12200 Northrup Way, Bellevue, represented the
applicant. He stated that the applicant was in agreement with
staff's recommendations.
MR. CAGLE MOVED TO ACCEPT THE SUBMITTAL WITH THE PROVISO THAT THE
THREE CONDITIONS ALL BE SUBMITTED TO STAFF FOR APPROVAL.
The conditions are as follows:
1. Light standard design.
2. Illumination plans.
3. Picnic area fixture designs.
MR. HAMILTON SECONDED THE MOTION WHICH WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
DIRECTORS REPORT
Mr. Pace reviewed upcoming Planning Commission meetings including
August 30, 1988 and September 8, 1988 for the Foster and Thorn
dyke Annexation hearings.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 11:07 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Joanne Johnson, Secretary
:
Cit y of Tukwila
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
6200 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila, Washington 98188
(206) 433 -1849
STAFF REPORT
to the Board of Architectural Review
Prepared August 8, 1988
HEARING DATE: August 25, 1988
FILE NUMBER: 88 -10 -DR
APPLICANT: Costco, Inc.
REQUEST: To construct a 365 -space parking lot expansion and associated
landscape /picnic area.
LOCATION: 1160 Saxon Drive in SW * of Sec. 25, Twn. 23, Rge. 4;
Tukwila, WA
ACREAGE: 2.57 acres
COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN DESIGNATION: Light Industrial
ZONING DISTRICT: C -M (Industrial Park)
SEPA
DETERMINATION: Determination of Non - Significance issued August 18, 1988.
ATTACHMENTS: (A) Site Plan
(B) Landscape Plan
(C) Grading and Shoreline Profiles
(D) Surrounding Land Use
rc�ci :arc- .:,,H ».,�..,> n_.., oxri. s'.. i.:......,.,.,.", d's;:,'.�.l:;,x...n`L,l.t.`:ia' T:) l`.•' �i` n�(.' S: b>" y: 1T1: 4 ?!.11f..1!4:!'fiiS.it4i1Cy�7:L"fi =_`!'. h; i :........... :G�S(+c'W.'fit:.J;iC':?':f. ^.-i'
STAFF REPORT 88- 10 -DR: Costco, Inc.
to the BAR Page 2
VICINITY /SITE INFORMATION
DECISION CRITERIA
FINDINGS
1. Project Description: Costco proposes to construct approximately 365 parking
spaces as an expansion of their existing parking area, on a 2.57 -acre site.
Accessory improvements include a picnic area with public drinking fountain
in the northeast corner adjacent to Christensen Trail, 20 feet of heavily
landscaped buffer adjacent to the trail, and buffer landscaping along the
north property line. These improvements are shown in Attachments A, B and C.
2. Existing Development: The site is currently vacant and overgrown with
grasses and shrubs.
3. Surrounding Land Use: Surrounding land use is shown in Attachment D. The
project site is bordered on the south and east by the City's Christensen
Recreational Trail, on the north by a concrete, light - industrial building
and the P -17 drainage pond, and on the west by the existing Costco parking
lot and building.
4. Terrain: The project site is generally flat with an overall grade of less
than 5 percent.
5. Access: Access to the project site is via Saxon Drive, through the existing
Costco parking lot entrance.
6. Public Facilities: The P -17 drainage pond is adjacent to the northeast
property line. This is a storm water retention basin as well as a wetland
of approximately 6 acres. The portion adjacent to the project site is an
upland area, heavily wooded with deciduous trees and scrub brush.
The City's Christensen Trail is adjacent to the eastern property line. This
major recreational facility is centered around a 10 -12 foot wide paved trail
on a 40 -foot landscaped right -of -way.
The proposed parking area expansion is located within the Shoreline zone and is
therefore subject to review based on general Board guidelines (TMC 18.60.030
(2)(A)). Board guidelines (TMC 18.60.050) are shown below in bold along with
pertinent findings of fact.
1. Relationship of Structure to Site (i.e., street transition and moderation
of parking area impacts)
The heavy perimeter landscaping, picnic area and public water fountain serve
to provide a desirable transition from Christensen Trail to parking areas.
The visual impact of paved parking areas are moderated by landscaping along
the perimeter and landscape islands in the parking lot.
CONCLUSIONS
RECOMMENDATIONS
88- 10 -DR: Costco, Inc.
Page 3
2. Relationship of Structure and Site to Adjoining Area (i.e., compatibility of
pedestrian systems)
Eastern perimeter landscaping will be compatible with that found on the
Christensen Trail, the public water fountain will enhance trail usage, and
evergreen trees along the northern perimeter will buffer adjacent uses. No
wetland areas will be disturbed. Vehicular circulation patterns will not be
significantly affected.
3. Landscaping and Site Treatment
See discussion of Criteria 1 and 2. The eastern perimeter landscaping is
compatible with the Christensen Trail. No lighting details have as yet been
received.
4. Building Design
No buildings are being proposed.
5. Miscellaneous Structures and Street Furniture
Picnic tables and a public drinking fountain are proposed in the northeast
corner of the site. No details of materials to be used have as yet been
received.
The proposed project satisfies all Board criteria subject to the following
conditions:
A. Light standards shall not exceed 20 feet in height and shall not cast
off -site glare.
B. Miscellaneous picnic area fixtures shall be compatible with the
low- intensity river trail.
The Planning Department recommends approval of the proposed parking lot
expansion subject to approval of:
n
attachment b
planting details
landscape plan
ST
Gov', of a'
?.80 crei
40 4.
MINK LER
HE PRUD NTI
COI
• AM •.. •
; BLDGS. A a
•
.6$1.
A biNDING SITE PLAN
:mu, .11 541
S. 7$45
it6e
, 4119
1113 AC
Gov't Lot 8
COO 11474"
p/ZA/A C
EAS
.314
S tD..
- BLVD.
Ar7if
(' Sal°
• 14
JON., t *11.3.4■
355
(■•• a•A‘ ••(‘
P.141
65SAc.
1114
0.
I N
•••! "Uovl 1-01 5 Y6(1,4
t_23.
r•
1 •:
I:
gar
24
NT D
! R
t
T F? I A I
J
LI
n
0? AL
46
0
A. •
.1( •r•
afiCNER StOwl
II P.P( CO Ml.
a I
S /8/37 4 Sr
ARC0(111 I3t)w.t A I
c isPoR,
rt$55i
Govt LI
4410
•2
-ST
RILLIA
•
1. BRIEFLY DESCRIBE YOUR PROPOSAL: EXPAND EXISTING PARKING LOT AND ADD
LANDSCAPING.
2. PROJECT LOCATION: (Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s),
block, and subdivision; or tax lot number, access
street, and nearest intersection)
ANDOVER PARK EAST AND SAXON DRIVE
Quarter: ` ,Sc» Section:
3. APPLICANT :* Name:
Signature:
Address:
4. PROPERTY Name:
OWNER
DESIGN REVIEW APPLA;ATION
Phone: (206) 881 -760
Address:
Phone:
(This information may be found on your tax statement.)
COSTCO/MULVANNY ARCHIATECTS (JERRY LEE)
12200 NORTHUP WAY, BELLEVUE, WA 98005
* Tht✓appl(i is the person whom the staff will contact regarding
the application, and to whom all notices and reports shall be sent,
unless otherwise stipulated by applicant.
AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP
COSTCO WHOLESALE
(206) 828 -8100
I (6 d S<Cxanv - be,
Township: 23N Range: Is,
TCR ` Date: 8/28/88
10809 - 120TH AVENUE N.E., KIRKLAND, WA 98033
ug (AO
I /WE,Esignature(s)J AGENT FOR COSTCO
swear that I/jkar e owner(s) or Contract purchaser(s) of the
,.fi';I, , property involve n this application and that the foregoing
CITY , pFUItV1f(LA> statements and answers contained in this application are true and
correct to the best of my /our
m,.., `� } t , i , knowledge and belief. Date: 8/28/88
BUILDING} DM'
RESPONSE:
5. RELATIONSHIP OF STRUCTURE TO SITE
t ^, Y�_�.vli:.^. <�i:t �i�..... :i t'1 A.Y: y: inr• w, vw9' rnY� YIJ1i� •CT,�r'.s;�r'`�.:KrI'.K!�rr.zC fl .�.vMr.rvr
".._SIGN REVIEW APPLICATION
Page 2
The following criteria will be used by the BAR in its decision - making on your
proposed project. Please carefully review the criteria, respond to each cri-
terion (if appropriate), and describe how your plans and elevations meet the
criteria. If the space provided for response is insufficient, use extra space
on last page or use blank paper to complete response and attach to this form.
A. The site should be planned to accomplish a desirable transition with
the streetscape and to provide for adequate landscaping, and pedestrian
movement.
B. Parking and service areas should be located, designed, and screened to
moderate the visual impact of large paved areas.
C. The height and scale of each building should be considered in relation
to it site.
NO STRUCTURE ADDED. HEAVY LANDSCAPE BUFFER HAS BEEN PROVIDED
AS A TRANSITION BETWEEN PARKING LOT AND GREEN RIVER /TRAIL.
6. RELATIONSHIP OF STRUCTURE AND SITE TO ADJOINING AREA
A. Harmony in texture, lines, and masses is encouraged.
B. Appropriate landscape transition to adjoining properties should be
provided.
C. Public buildings and structures should be consistent with the estab-
lished neighborhood character.
D. Compatibility of vehicular pedestrian circulation patterns and loading
facilities in terms of safety, efficiency and convenience should be
encouraged.
E. Compatibility of on -site vehicular circulation with street circulation
should be encouraged.
RESPONSE: NO STRUCTURE ADDED. PICNIC AREA ADDED AT NE CORNER OF PROPERTY.
7. LANDSCAPE AND SITE TREATMENT
.ice +)f:f.:= .i3'.;,'S: 'S! {; 4 \J8' ±I �,N'4[:M,5)f VH"Ti.. M.r�'Yllfln4. !N'rtev..:�l'wP�iP.Yw Afmt IrNxM' V.xa� AnITCtwhy+n,... n.•r 'w��..
PLANT MATERIAL IS BEING ADDED.
c 'vc f SIGN REVIEW APPLICATION
Page 3
A. Where existing topographic patterns contribute to beauty and utility of
a development, they should be recognized and preserved and enhanced.
B. Grades of walks, parking spaces, terraces, and other paved areas should
promote safety and provide an inviting and stable appearance.
C. Landscape treatment should enhance architectural features, strengthen
vistas and important axis, and provide shade.
D. In locations where plants will be susceptible to injury by pedestrian
or motor traffic, mitigating steps should be taken.
E. Where building sites limit planting, the placement of trees or shrubs
in paved areas is encouraged.
F. Screening of service yards, and other places which tend to be un-
sightly, should be accomplished by use of walls, fencing, planting or
combinations of these. Screening should be effective in winter and
summer.
G. In areas where general planting will not prosper, other materials such
as fences, walls, and pavings of wood, brick, stone, or gravel may be
used.
H. Exterior lighting, when used, should enhance the building design and
the adjoining landscape. Lighting standards and fixtures should be of
a design and size compatible with the building and adjacent area.
Lighting should be shielded, and restrained in design. Excessive
brightness and brilliant colors should be avoided.
RESPONSE' SEE ENCLOSED LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS. EXISTING TREES ARE BEING
RELOCATED AND NEW LANDSCAPING HAS BEEN ADDED. IRRIGATION FOR NEW
41,7 Y.d., F£.rAlkm {Ve.k!x:.s:r .ae.• Marna..,, t+ x. snroww. ttywna rt arnxarax r.,rh ro cm..........+....w.w.
8. BUILDING DESIGN
uESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION
Page 4
A. Architectural style is not restricted, evaluation of a project should
be based on quality of its design and relationship to surroundings.
B. Buildings should be to appropriate scale and be in harmony with per-
manent neighboring developments.
C. Building components - such as windows, doors, eaves, and parapets -
should have good proportions and relationship to one another. Building
components and ancillary parts shall be consistent with anticipated
life of the structure.
D. Colors should be harmonious, with bright or brilliant colors used only
for accent.
E. Mechanical equipment or other utility hardware on roof, ground or
buildings should be screened from view.
F. Exterior lighting should be part of the architectural concept. Fix-
tures, standards and all exposed accessories should be harmonious with
building design.
G. Monotony of design in single or multiple buildings projects should be
avoided. Variety of detail, form, and siting should be used to provide
visual interest.
RESPONSE:
N/
,ha..a•t�:c
9. MISCELLANEOUS STRUCTURES AND STREET FURNITURE
PEDESTRIAN DRINKING FOUNTAIN.
INTERURBAN SPECIAL REVIEW DISTRICT
SEE LANDSCAPE PLAN.
`ucSIGN REVIEW APPLICATION
Page 5
A. Miscellaneous structures and street furniture should be designed to be
part of the architectural concept of design and landscape. Materials
should be compatible with buildings, scale should be appropriate,
colors should be in harmony with buildings and surroundings, and pro-
portions should be to scale.
B. Lighting in connection with miscellaneous structures and street furni-
ture should meet the guidelines applicable to site, landscape and
buildings.
RESPONSE' PICNIC AREA IS BEING ADDED IN N.E CORNER OF PROPERTY ALONG WITH
The following six criteria are used in the special review of the Interurban area
in order to manage the development of this area, to upgrade its general appear-
ance, to provide incentives for compatible uses, to recognize and to capitalize
on the benefits to the area of the amenities including the Green River and
nearby recreational facilities, to encourage development of more people- oriented
use, and to provide for development incentives that will help to spur growth.
Please describe how your proposed development relates to the goals for this
District. Use additional response space, if necessary.
10. The proposed development design should be sensitive to the natural amenities
of the area.
NEW 20' LANDSCAPE BUFFER WILL HELP SCREEN EXISTING WAREHOUSE BULLDING.
11. The proposed development use should demonstrate due regard for the use and
enjoyment of public recreational areas and facilities.
...._....�.... vow. wa. MU.. o✓ aa:.. aseuriim.. r.. rrs+. v.. r•. xwn. u. urrm .2 + "lh , . c• . oyvrd�wY�Anx� +n1 : ay. ^ nm.v w r . <..n..rmnn+n
N/A
SEE NEW LANDSCAPE PLAN.
NEW BUFFER WILL ENHANCE TRAIL.
(29 /DSGN.APP1 -3)
`uESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION
Page 6
12. The proposed development should provide for safe and convenient on -site
pedestrian circulation.
13. The proposed property use should be compatible with neighboring uses and
complementary to the district in which it is located.
DEVELOPMENT WILL BE COMPATIBLE WITH NEIGH- (BORING USE.
14. The proposed development should seek to minimize significant adverse
environmental impacts.
15. The proposed development should demonstrate due regard for significant
historical features in the area.
9/13/88
88 -11 -DR
FORT DENT TWO * 14-ttZr
6840 SOUTHCENTER BOULEVARD
JOHN C. RADOVICH
EPIC -27 -88
88 -3 -SMP
10/6/88
88 -12 -DR
TUKWILA POND
TUKWILA POND
-
JOEL BENOLIEL
8$ -E -TEA:
EPIC -28 -88
10/10/88
88 -13 -DR
/.- _ V ,-
FOSTER CENTER L - N 524, F -�
S.E. 4 of 52ND ST. /INTERURBAN AVENUE
INTERSECTION
BOB FADDEN
EPIC -29- 88/88 -4 -SMP
89 -5 -BLA
APPROVED
10/12/88
88 -14 -DR
PARKSIDE TOWNHOUSES GARAGE
BLDG. A - 6530 - 6538 S. 153RD ST.
BLDG. B - 6531 - 6537 S. 153RD ST.
11/7/88
88 -15 -DR
MCI COMMUNICATIONS
ALONG BURLINGTON NORTHERN - RR TRACKS
N. OF 1 -405, VICINITY OF GREEN &
DUWAMISH RIVERS
MARK HEIDECKE
88 -5 -SMP
APPROVED
DESIGN REVIEW 1988
13(2 4-7